a

ISSN 0101-2061 (Print)

Food Science and Technology ISSN 1678-457X (Online)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.14919

Influence of the addition of KCl and CaCl2 blends on the physicochemical parameters
of salted meat products throughout the processing steps
Vitor Andre Silva VIDAL1* , Camila de Souza PAGLARINI1, Alef FERREIRA1, José Roberto dos SANTOS1,
Marise Aparecida Rodrigues POLLONIO1

Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of different chloride salts (NaCl, KCl, and CaCl2) on the characteristics
of salted meat products through the determination of moisture, pH, aw, chloride, ash levels, cooking loss, and instrumental
color during the processing steps. Four salted meat treatments were elaborate using the following salts in the wet and dry
salting steps: FC1: 100% NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 25% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.
The addition of CaCl2 led to the lowest pH and changes in aw, moisture, ash levels, and instrumental color when compared
to the other treatments, which was different from the control (100% NaCl) and F1 (50% NaCl + 50% KCl), thus evidencing
the great effect of CaCl2 on the characteristics of salted meat products during the whole processing. The partial replacement
of NaCl by KCl and/or CaCl2 greatly increased the cooking loss of salted meat products. The replacement of NaCl by KCl
promoted similar quality parameters.
Keywords: salted meat; sodium reduction; potassium chloride; calcium chloride.
Pratical Application: Use of KCl and CaCl2 as a strategy to reduce sodium content in salted meat.

1. Introduction
Salted meat products are consumed and appreciated worldwide
due to their unique sensory characteristics and long shelf-life
(Liu et al., 2014). The manufacture of salted meat products is
based on the hurdle technology (Leistner, 1987), and several
steps such as salting (wet or dry), drying and ripening can be
used during processing (Mora et al., 2015), besides the addition
of sodium chloride (NaCl) and additives, and vacuum packaging
(Shimokomaki  et  al., 1998). The combination of these steps
provides the sensory characteristics and microbiological stability
for the processed product (Ishihara et al., 2013).
Changes in lifestyle associated with the modernization
of society and the development of new products have led to a
drastic change in eating habits, with increased consumption
of processed products. Some of these products can be a major
source of fat, sodium, and sugars, which can cause various health
problems when consumed in excess, such as obesity, diabetes,
and cardiovascular disorders (Roberfroid, 2002). Therefore, there
is a growing consumer’s demand for healthy eating perceptions
and healthy lifestyle, with a preference for meat products rich
in proteins and low in lipids, cholesterol and sodium (Lorenzo
& Carballo, 2015).
Sodium chloride is an ingredient extensively used and
very important to the development of numerous desirable
sensory and technological characteristics in meat products
(Inguglia et al., 2017). It plays an important role in salted meat
products, once when combined with other techniques, it can
preserve the product for months without refrigeration for later
consumption (Torres et al., 1989). However, NaCl is the main
source of sodium in the human diet (Desmond, 2006), and
the excessive sodium intake causes several deleterious health
effects such as high blood pressure, cardiovascular and renal
diseases (Cook et al., 2016; Denton et al., 1995; Frieden, 2016;
Strazzullo et al., 2009). The World Health Organization (WHO)
recommends a daily intake of 2 g of sodium, equivalent to 5 g
NaCl. In this context, an effective reduction of NaCl during
the manufacture of salted meat product, which presents a high
sodium content after processing, is extremely necessary to make
the product healthier.
There are many ways to reduce sodium content in meat
products. One of the most used strategies for reducing or
replacing NaCl is the use of other chloride salts as KCl (potassium
chloride), CaCl2 (calcium chloride) and MgCl2 (magnesium
chloride) (Aliño et al., 2010; Ripollés et al., 2011). Among the
chloride salts, KCl is widely used due to the development of
similar characteristics to NaCl in meat products; however, the
addition of KCl promotes bitter and metallic taste, thus impairing
the use in excess (Doyle & Glass, 2010; Grummer et al., 2013).
Although CaCl2 is also used as a substitute for NaCl, in some
cases it can negatively affect the texture and flavor characteristics
(Vidal et al., 2019).
Taking into account the deleterious health effects caused by
the excessive consumption of sodium in salted meat products,
the objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of blends
containing NaCl, KCl, and CaCl2 on the characteristics of salted
meat treatments.

Received 11 Jun., 2019

Accepted 09 Sept., 2019
1
Universidade Estadual de Campinas – UNICAMP, Campinas, SP, Brasil
*Corresponding author: vitorandrevidal@gmail.com

Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 40(3): 665-670, July-Sep. 2020 665/670 665
 Effects of different chloride salts on salted meat
2 Material and methods
2.1 Treatments, raw materials, and additives
The bovine raw meat (biceps femoris) was purchased from
slaughterhouses with assured hygienic quality. The additives
sodium nitrite and sodium erythorbate were donated by the
company Kerry of Brazil. The salts NaCl, KCl, and CaCl2 were
purchased from Anidrol, Brazil.
Four salted meat treatments were made, as shown in Table 1.
The concentration of KCl and CaCl2 substitute salts was based on
the calculation of ionic strength to make up the ionic strength of
50% and 25% of NaCl, obtaining the same final ionic strength in
all treatments. Then, the blends were made in sufficient quantity
for the salting steps, depending on the weight of the raw meat,
using 2 kg salt per kg of meat. Similar amounts of the additives
sodium nitrite (150 ppm) and sodium erythorbate (500 ppm)
were added in the wet salting step, and the salt was the variable
of the wet and dry salting steps.
2.2 Processing
The manufacturing process was carried out according to
Vidal et al. (2019) and the salts added were described in Table 1.
The bovine raw meat pieces have been cut standardized to be
submitted to the salting steps (wet and dry). In the wet salting step,
the treatment were submerged in a respective saturated solution
with respective salts, sodium nitrite and sodium erythorbate
for 1 hour. During the dry salting period, the treatments were
in contact with respective salts for 144 hours (6 days) at 13 °C.
The  ripening step were carried out in a controlled climatic
chamber (Instala Frio, Curitiba, Brazil) with 55% humidity,
25 °C and 0.5 m/s forced air ventilation for 24 hours. After the
process, the pieces were vacuum packed with polyethylene (Spel,
São Paulo, Brazil) and stored at 25 °C.
All the manufacture process was performed in three replicates
on different days with the same methodology, formulation and
technology. All the processing steps were carried out in the Meat
Laboratory of the Department of Food Technology (DTA) at
University of Campinas (UNICAMP).
2.3 Physicochemical characterization
The chloride content was determined according Doughty
(1924) using silver nitrate for reaction and potassium chromate
as indicator. The moisture and ash content was determined
according to Horwitz & Latimer (2005). The pH was determined
by homogenizing 10 g sample and distilled water (1:10), utilizing
combined electrode (22 DM, Digimed, São Paulo, Brazil).
Table 1. Salts used to performed the salted meat treatments.
Treatments NaCl (%) NaCl (mg)*
FC1 100 1000
F1 50 441
F2 50 614
F3 50 513
The amount of salt added was based on the ionic strength, all treatments obtained the same ionic strength. *Salt proportion added according to ionic strength, for each 1000mg of
bovine raw meat was utilized 2000mg of salt.
666 666/670
The water activity (aw) was measured at 20 °C using the Aqualab
apparatus (Decagon Devices Inc., Pullman, USA).
The instrumental color was measured using the Hunter Lab
colorimeter (Colourquest II, Hunter Associates Laboratory Inc.,
Virginia, USA) with D65 illuminant, 20 mm aperture and standard
10° observer. CIELAB L*, a*, and b* parameters were determined
as an indicator of luminosity, red intensity, and yellow intensity,
respectively. The whiteness index (W) was calculated by the
following equation: 100 − ( 100 − L * ) 2 + a * 2 + b * 2  1 / 2. The
samples were kept at room temperature (25 °C) during analysis.
All analyses were performed in triplicate for each replicate
of the experiment.
2.4 Cooking loss
The samples of the different treatments were cut into portions
of 6x6 cm and desalted using a ratio of 1:6 (sample:water), with
continuous water exchange every 2 hours for 30 hours, and
then vacuum packed for cooking. Cooking was carried out in a
water bath (RSA-1708, RSA, Campinas, Brazil) at 80°C, and the
temperature of the samples was monitored by a thermocouple.
From the moment the center of the sample reached 72 ° C,
remaining at this temperature for 60 minutes.
After cooking procedure, the cooked samples were
weighed after 30 minutes at room temperature. The cooking
loss was calculated as a percent of weight difference between
raw meat and cooked sample using the following equation:
cooking loss ( raw sample − cooked sample / raw sample ) x 100.
=
2.5 Statistical analysis
For each process, at least three samples were taken for each
analysis. The results were expressed as the averages from all
data. Data were analyzed using a General Linear Model (GLM)
considering the treatments as a fixed effect and the replicates
as a random effect. Significant differences were analyzed by the
Tukey’s test at the 5% level of significance utilizing the commercial
software Statistica v. 8 (Statsoft Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA).
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Chloride, ash, and moisture contents
The moisture contents are presented in Table 2, chlorides
levels in Table  3 and ash in Table  4. There is a relationship
among the chloride levels and the ash and moisture contents
of the samples.
KCl (%) KCl (mg)* CaCl2 (%) CaCl2 (mg)*
- - - -
50 560 - -
- - 50 387
25 326 25 162
Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 40(3): 665-670, July-Sep. 2020
 Vidal et al.

The treatment F2 (50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2) had the lowest
ash (P < 0.05) and the highest moisture contents (P < 0.05) in
the final product when compared to the other treatments. These
results may be due to the difficulty of CaCl2 to penetrate into the
product, once it was used in excess (equivalent to 50% of ionic
strength).CaCl2 is used in several products as a dehydrating
agent, once calcium ions increase the mass transfer leading to a
higher dehydration rate (Lewicki & Michaluk, 2004). However,
the high dehydration may have formed a dry barrier on the
surface of the samples, impairing the water release from meat
and the penetration of salt (Vidal et al., 2019).
3.2 pH and aw
The results of pH of salted meat treatments are shown in
Table 5. In general, a decrease in the pH values was observed
during the process. The addition of CaCl2 decreased the pH
values when compared to the treatments containing only

Table 2. Moisture (%) in salted meat treatments during process.

Treatments Raw meat AWS ADS FP Standard error
FC1 75.15 72.54aA 52.75bB 50.61bC 1.94
F1 75.19a 72.52aA 52.39bB 50.55bC 1.95
F2 75.22a 72.90aA 51.28cB 51.44aB 1.99
F3 75.21a 72.98aA 55.16aB 50.06bC 1.92
Standard error 0.13 0.11 0.24 0.12
Values are means. a, b, c, d Means in the same column followed by different lowercase letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). A,B,C,D Means in the same
line followed by different capital letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). AWS: after wet salting; ADS: after dry salting; FP: final product. FC1: 100%
NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.

Table 3. Chlorides (%) values in salted meat treatments during process.

Chlorides
Treatments
Raw meat AWS ADS FP Standard error
FC1 0.21a 1.86cC 16.44aA 14.53abB 1.29
F1 0.20a 2.34bB 16.76aA 15.56aA 1.31
F2 0.20a 2.39abC 16.41aA 13.23bB 1.19
F3 0.20a 2.54aB 16.37aA 15.28aA 1.27
Standard error 0.01 0.05 0.29 0.28
Values are means. a, b, c, d Means in the same column followed by different lowercase letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). A,B,C,D Means in the same
line followed by different capital letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). AWS: after wet salting; ADS: after dry salting; FP: final product. FC1: 100%
NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.

Table 4. Ash (%) and cooking loss (%) values in salted meat treatments during process.
Ash
Treatment Cooking Loss
Raw meat AWS ADS FP Standard error
FC1 1.07a 2.66cC 17.93bA 17.32cB 1.23 16.94b
F1 1.04a 3.55aC 19.55aA 18.79aB 1.39 26.67a
F2 1.03a 3.15bC 15.85cA 15.16dB 1.08 25.60a
F3 1.09a 3.48aB 19.22aA 18.99aA 1.34 25.55a
Standard error 0.01 0.07 0.26 0.32 0.78
Values are means. a, b, c, d Means in the same column followed by different lowercase letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). A,B,C,D Means in the same
line followed by different capital letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). AWS: after wet salting; ADS: after dry salting; FP: final product. FC1: 100%
NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.

Table 5. pH values in salted meat treatments during process.

Standard
Treatment Raw meat AWS 1º day 2º day 3º day 4º day 5º day ADS FP
error
FC1 5.63a 5.61abB 6.05aA 5.46aD 5.45aD 5.47aD 5.24aE 5.52aC 5.25bE 0.12
F1 5.63a 5.63abB 5.93bA 5.46aBC 5.41bCD 5.38bCD 5.26aD 5.49aBC 5.39aCD 0.08
F2 5.64a 5.42bB 5.83cA 5.40bB 5.28cC 5.16cD 5.17bD 5.31bB 5.13cD 0.05
F3 5.65a 5.73aB 5.88bcA 5.41bC 5.26dD 5.12dE 4.99cF 5.18cDE 5.00dF 0.07
Standard error 0.01 0.09 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.13
Values are means. a, b, c, d Means in the same column followed by different lowercase letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). A,B,C,D Means in the same
line followed by different capital letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). AWS: after wet salting; ADS: after dry salting; FP: final product. FC1: 100%
NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.

Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 40(3): 665-670, July-Sep. 2020 667/670 667
 Effects of different chloride salts on salted meat

NaCl and KCl, once the treatments F2 (50% NaCl + 50%
CaCl2) and F3 (50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2) presented
lower pH values when compared to FC1 (100% NaCl) and F1
(50% NaCl + 50% KCl). Other authors have reported the effect
of CaCl2 on the pH reduction of meat products with reduced
NaCl content (Gimeno  et  al., 2001; Lawrence  et  al., 2003;
Gimeno et al., 1999; Vidal et al., 2019).
Aw is a very relevant parameter to ensure food safety, and
especially in salted meat products, the low aw can confer stability
during several months of storage (Toldrá, 2006). As expected, the
addition of salts to the treatments significantly reduced the aw
values during the process, as shown in Table 6. The treatment F2
(50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2) presented the highest aw values (P <0.05)
during the dry salting and in the final product. As previously
discussed, the higher addition of CaCl2 during the dry salting
may have caused a rapid surface drying, impairing the water
release in the treatments.
3.3 Instrumental color
The color characteristics of meat and meat products are
fundamental for the consumers’ acceptance of the product, and
myoglobin is the only pigment present in sufficient amount capable
of providing red color (Mancini & Hunt, 2005). As can be seen
in Table 7, the color parameters L* (luminosity), a* (red‑green
dimension), b* (yellow-blue dimension) and W (whiteness index)
of the treatments were affected by the addition of different salts.

Table 6. Aw values in salted meat treatments during process.

Standard
Treatment Raw meat AWS 1º day 2º day 3º day 4º day 5º day ADS FP
error
FC1 0.988a 0.977aA 0.948bB 0.893bC 0.851bD 0.827bE 0.786bF 0.778bG 0.769bH 0.005
F1 0.989a 0.973aA 0.918dB 0.864cC 0.845cD 0.803cE 0.775cF 0.765cG 0.752cH 0.009
F2 0.988a 0.974aA 0.956aB 0.904aC 0.901aC 0.846aD 0.827aE 0.799aF 0.781aG 0.009
F3 0.989a 0.976aA 0.939cB 0.889bC 0.855bD 0.826bE 0.783bF 0.776bG 0.756cH 0.008
Standard 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002
error
Values are means. a, b, c, d Means in the same column followed by different lowercase letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). A,B,C,D Means in the same
line followed by different capital letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). AWS: after wet salting; ADS: after dry salting; FP: final product. FC1: 100%
NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.

Table 7. L* (luminosity), a* (red-green dimension), b* (yellow-blue dimension) e W (whiteness index) values in salted meat treatments during
process.
Tr. Raw meat AWS 1º day 2º day 3º day 4º day 5º day ADS FP Standard error
L*
FC1 37.09a 37.61aD 32.07bcF 32.41cF 35.94bE 41.91bC 49.83aA 41.53dC 47.93bB 0.74
F1 37.33a 34.00bE 32.61bF 33.21cF 35.67bD 39.29cC 42.88bB 46.61bA 47.51bA 0.68
F2 37.54a 36.84aE 31.38cG 35.45bF 34.19cF 39.33cD 40.06cC 44.00cB 48.15bA 0.61
F3 36.89a 37.59aF 34.95aG 36.53aF 44.43aD 45.83aC 43.12bE 48.58aB 54.26aA 0.74
Standard error 0.54 0.29 0.25 0.31 0.69 0.47 0.62 0.49 0.50
a*
FC1 16.94a 8.80cD 15.23dA 14.58aA 14.44aA 11.89aB 12.34aB 10.53aC 12.03aB 0.25
F1 16.74a 9.87bE 16.21cA 13.61bB 12.08bC 10.66bD 11.76aC 9.78bE 10.36bDE 0.25
F2 16.23a 11.54aE 18.31aA 12.77cD 14.55aC 9.41cF 9.45bB 8.41cG 7.81cG 0.42
F3 16.41a 9.89bD 16.90bA 12.75cB 11.99bC 9.79cD 9.64bD 8.80cE 6.78dF 0.34
Standard error 0.62 0.18 0.20 0.16 0.21 0.18 0.44 0.15 0.37
b*
FC1 18.05a 13.79aF 15.66aDE 16.03aCD 15.19bE 16.65abBC 19.12aA 16.39bBCD 17.12aB 0.18
F1 18.39a 12.02bE 14.76bCD 14.51bD 14.31cD 15.89bBC 16.46cAB 17.64aA 16.32abBB 0.21
F2 17.84a 13.24aE 16.05aB 14.22bCD 14.95bC 14.54cCD 17.81bA 13.91cDE 15.72bB 0.17
F3 18.22a 13.15aE 16.23aC 14.93bD 17.28aAB 16.84aBC 15.36dD 17.86aA 15.55bD 0.17
Standard error 0.22 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.30 0.15
W
FC1 32.40a 35.50aC 28.65bE 29.02dE 32.60bD 38.41bB 44.91aA 38.36cB 43.86cA 0.69
F1 32.58a 32.18bD 29.14bE 30.31cE 33.00bD 36.34cC 39.40bB 42.91bA 44.05cA 0.64
F2 33.05a 34.43aD 27.18cG 32.68bE 30.96cF 36.91cC 35.45cD 41.69bB 45.26bA 0.65
F3 32.29a 35.46aE 30.85aG 33.56aF 40.59aD 42.43aC 40.29bD 44.85aB 51.21aA 0.73
Standard error 0.37 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.64 0.42 0.58 0.44 0.53
Values are means. a, b, c, d Means in the same column followed by different lowercase letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). A,B,C,D Means in the same
line followed by different capital letters present statistically significant difference by the Tukey test (P < 0.05). AWS: after wet salting; ADS: after dry salting; FP: final product. FC1: 100%
NaCl; F1: 50% NaCl + 50% KCl; F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2; F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2.

668 668/670 Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 40(3): 665-670, July-Sep. 2020
 Vidal et al.
A lower intensity of red color was observed in the salted meat
products (P <0.05) with the addition of KCl (F1: 50% NaCl + 50%
KCl), which was more pronounced (P <0.05) in the treatments
with the addition of CaCl2 (F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2 and
F3: 50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2) in relation to the control
made with 100% NaCl (FC1). In addition, the parameter W
(whiteness index) increased (P < 0.05) in all treatments during
the manufacturing process of the salted meat products. Similar
results were found by Vidal et al. (2019) who replaced NaCl by
KCl and CaCl2 in jerked beef.
3.4 Cooking loss
The heat treatment induces the water loss in meat and meat
products, and the determination of this parameter during cooking
is very important to predict yielding, the nutritional quality,
and the sensory properties of the product, mainly regarding
the juiciness perception (Bertram et al., 2003). The cooking loss
values are presented in Table 4.
The parcial replacement of NaCl by KCl and CaCl2 increased
considerably (P <0.05) the cooking loss values. The control
treatment (FC1: 100% NaCl) presented 16.94% of cooking loss
in relation to the treatments containing NaCl + KCl (F1: 50%
NaCl + 50% KCl), NaCl + CaCl2 (F2: 50% NaCl + 50% CaCl2)
and NaCl + KCl + CaCl2 (50% NaCl + 25% KCl + 25% CaCl2),
which exhibited values from 25.55 to 26.67%, with no significant
difference (P <0.05) between them. This substitution may have
increased the protein denaturation during cooking, with a
lower trapping of water molecules within the protein structures
maintained by the capillary forces (Aaslyng et al., 2003).
As mentioned, the cooking loss is a very important parameter
affecting several characteristics, and the differences in cooking
loss around 9% between the control and the treatments with
partial replacement of NaCl by salt substitutes can directly affect
the quality of the final product.
4 Conclusion
The addition of CaCl2 during the processing of salted meat
products significantly affected all the parameters studied when
compared to the treatments containing only NaCl (control) or
NaCl + KCl, with a consequent impact on product’s quality.
The replacement of NaCl by KCl and CaCl2 significantly
increased the cooking loss, which may affect the sensory
characteristics of the salted meat product. In general, the treatment
containing NaCl + KCl presented similar characteristics to
the control treatment containing only NaCl; however, the use
of KCl should be carried out with caution due to the risk of
hyperkalemia in patients with kidney disease.
References
Aaslyng, M. D., Bejerholm, C., Ertbjerg, P., Bertram, H. C., & Andersen,
H. J. (2003). Cooking loss and juiciness of pork in relation to raw
meat quality and cooking procedure. Food Quality and Preference,
14(4), 277-288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00086-1.
Aliño, M., Grau, R., Fuentes, A., & Barat, J. M. (2010). Influence of
low-sodium mixtures of salts on the post-salting stage of dry-cured
Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 40(3): 665-670, July-Sep. 2020
ham process. Journal of Food Engineering, 99(2), 198-205. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2010.02.020.
Bertram, H. C., Andersen, H. J., Karlsson, A. H., Horn, P., Hedegaard,
J., Nørgaard, L., & Engelsen, S. B. (2003). Prediction of technological
quality (cooking loss and Napole Yield) of pork based on fresh
meat characteristics. Meat Science, 65(2), 707-712. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00272-3. PMid:22063431.
Cook, N. R., Appel, L. J., & Whelton, P. K. (2016). Sodium intake and all-
cause mortality over 20 years in the trials of hypertension prevention.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 68(15), 1609-1617.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.07.745. PMid:27712772.
Denton, D., Weisinger, R., Mundy, N. I., Wickings, E. J., Dixson, A.,
Moisson, P., Pingard, A. M., Shade, R., Carey, D., Ardaillou, R.,
Paillard, F., Chapman, J., Thillet, J., & Michel, J. B. (1995). The effect
of increased salt intake on blood pressure of chimpanzees. Nature
Medicine, 1(10), 1009-1016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm1095-
1009. PMid:7489355.
Desmond, E. (2006). Reducing salt: a challenge for the meat industry.
Meat Science, 74(1), 188-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
meatsci.2006.04.014. PMid:22062728.
Doughty, H. W. (1924). Mohr’s method for the determination of silver
and halogens in other than neutral solutions. Journal of the American
Chemical Society, 46(12), 2707-2709. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/
ja01677a014.
Doyle, M. E., & Glass, K. A. (2010). Sodium reduction and its effect
on food safety, food quality, and human health. Comprehensive
Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 9(1), 44-56. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00096.x.
Frieden, T. R. (2016). Sodium reduction — saving lives by putting
choice into consumers’ hands. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 316(6), 579-580. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.7992.
PMid:27249371.
Gimeno, O., Astiasarán, I., & Bello, J. (1999). Influence of partial
replacement of NaCl with KCl and CaCl2 on texture and color of
dry fermented sausages. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,
47(3), 873-877. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf980597q. PMid:10552384.
Gimeno, O., Astiasarán, I., & Bello, J. (2001). Influence of partial
replacement of NaCl with KCl and CaCl2on microbiological evolution
of dry fermented sausages. Food Microbiology, 18(3), 329-334. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1006/fmic.2001.0405.
Grummer, J., Bobowski, N., Karalus, M., Vickers, Z., & Schoenfuss,
T. (2013). Use of potassium chloride and flavor enhancers in low
sodium Cheddar cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 96(3), 1401-1418.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-6057. PMid:23332837.
Horwitz, W., & Latimer, G. W. (2005). Official methods of analysis of
AOAC International (19th ed.). Maryland: AOAC International.
Inguglia, E. S., Zhang, Z., Tiwari, B. K., Kerry, J. P., & Burgess, C. M.
(2017). Salt reduction strategies in processed meat products – a
review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 59, 70-78. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.10.016.
Ishihara, Y., Moreira, R., Souza, G., Salviano, A., & Madruga, M.
(2013). Study of the warner-bratzler shear force, sensory analysis
and sarcomere length as indicators of the tenderness of sun-dried
beef. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 18(8), 9432-9440. http://dx.doi.
org/10.3390/molecules18089432. PMid:23966070.
Lawrence, T. E., Dikeman, M. E., Hunt, M. C., Kastner, C. L., & Johnson,
D. E. (2003). Effects of calcium salts on beef longissimus quality.
Meat Science, 64(3), 299-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-
1740(02)00201-2. PMid:22063016.
669/670 669
 Effects of different chloride salts on salted meat
Leistner, L. (1987). Shelf stable product andintermediate moisture
foods based on meat. In: L. Rockland & L. B. Beauchat (Eds.),
Water activitytheory and application to food (pp. 295-328), New
York: Marcel Dekker Inc.
Lewicki, P. P., & Michaluk, E. (2004). Drying of tomato pretreated
with calcium. Drying Technology, 22(8), 1813-1827. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1081/DRT-200032777.
Liu, D., Pu, H., Sun, D.-W., Wang, L., & Zeng, X.-A. (2014). Combination
of spectra and texture data of hyperspectral imaging for prediction
of pH in salted meat. Food Chemistry, 160, 330-337. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.03.096. PMid:24799246.
Lorenzo, J. M., & Carballo, J. (2015). Changes in physico-chemical
properties and volatile compounds throughout the manufacturing
process of dry-cured foal loin. Meat Science, 99, 44-51. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.08.013. PMid:25280362.
Mancini, R. A., & Hunt, M. C. (2005). Current research in meat
color. Meat Science, 71(1), 100-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
meatsci.2005.03.003. PMid:22064056.
Mora, L., Gallego, M., Escudero, E., Reig, M., Aristoy, M. C., & Toldrá,
F. (2015). Small peptides hydrolysis in dry-cured meats. International
Journal of Food Microbiology, 212, 9-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijfoodmicro.2015.04.018. PMid:25944374.
Ripollés, S., Campagnol, P. C. B., Armenteros, M., Aristoy, M. C., &
Toldrá, F. (2011). Influence of partial replacement of NaCl with
KCl, CaCl2 and MgCl2 on lipolysis and lipid oxidation in dry-
670 670/670
cured ham. Meat Science, 89(1), 58-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
meatsci.2011.03.021. PMid:21531513.
Roberfroid, M. B. (2002). Global view on functional foods: european
perspectives. British Journal of Nutrition, 88(Suppl. 2), S133-S138.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/BJN2002677. PMid:12495454.
Shimokomaki, M., Franco, B. D. G. M., Biscontini, T. M., Pinto, M.
F., Terra, N. N., & Zorn, T. M. T. (1998). Charqui meats are hurdle
technology meat products. Food Reviews International, 14(4), 339-
349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87559129809541167.
Strazzullo, P., D’elia, L., Kandala, N.-B., & Cappuccio, F. P. (2009).
Salt intake, stroke, and cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of
prospective studies. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 339, b4567. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b4567. PMid:19934192.
Toldrá, F. (2006). Dry-cured ham. In: Y. H. Hui (Ed.), Handbook of food
science, technology and engineering (pp. 641-658). Flórida: CRC Press.
Torres, E., Pearson, A. M., Gray, J. I., Ku, P. K., & Shimokomaki, M. (1989).
Lipid oxidation in charqui (salted and dried beef). Food Chemistry,
32(4), 257-268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0308-8146(89)90085-X.
Vidal, V. A. S., Biachi, J. P., Paglarini, C. S., Pinton, M. B., Campagnol,
P. C. B., Esmerino, E. A., Cruz, A. G., Morgano, M. A., & Pollonio,
M. A. R. (2019). Reducing 50% sodium chloride in healthier jerked
beef: An efficient design to ensure suitable stability, technological
and sensory properties. Meat Science, 152, 49-57. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.02.005. PMid:30802818.
Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 40(3): 665-670, July-Sep. 2020